Holy Communion = cannibalism?

[Luvtosew]

Because there is nothing we can do to the consecrated host which would damage or destroy or even subdivide the body of Christ. In cannibalism, we destroy or subdivide the flesh of the one being consumed–a piece at a time. With the Eucharist, that is impossible. Jesus can only be received whole and entire, whether you receive an entire host or only 1/16th of a host.

hey I’m sorry I mis read impossible for possible. don’t know how I did that.

…if you accept this odd new definition of cannibalism, rather than the simple “eating human flesh” definition most would use.
Today 12:38 pm
Dont know what you mean by that, do you mean we are** not **eating flesh? then I agree.

 

[JimG]

hey I’m sorry I mis read impossible for possible. don’t know how I did that.

…if you accept this odd new definition of cannibalism, rather than the simple “eating human flesh” definition most would use.
Today 12:38 pm
Dont know what you mean by that, do you mean we are** not **eating flesh? then I agree.

Yes, we are consuming the body and blood of Jesus, which is exactly what he told us to do. Because of his mode of presence, though, we cannot in any way damage or destroy his flesh. He remains whole and entire always. That’s not the case with a cannibalism victim.

 

[fall_fox]

The Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ are contained truly, really, and substantially in the Eucharist. They are not present materially…

Be careful here. Not present materially??? In Gospel John Ch. 6 Christ said “My flesh is real food, My blood is real drink. He did not quibble, even some of his disciples left because of this. It was too much for them, too hard for them to believe. Jesus didn’t say, " wait, I only meant my flesh represents real food and my blood represents real drink.”
You know what, It is what it is.

 

[Laudate_Dominum]

Is Christ’s substance not physically there? Are you saying that Christ’s substance is only spiritually there?

Substance is what is truly there.
Accidents is what appears to the eye to be there.

You are right, “The accidents of bread and wine remain.” “That is, the look, texture, taste, smell, etc., of the bread and wine remains.” However, the substance is Christ. To the bodily eye it looks like bread and wine, however, it is Christ.

St Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church says in Summa Theologica:
“The substance of the bread or wine, after the consecration, remains neither under the sacramental species, nor elsewhere; yet it does not follow that it is annihilated; for it is changed into the body of Christ; just as if the air, from which fire is generated, be not there or elsewhere, it does not follow that it is annihilated.”

“Yet meanwhile in our pilgrimage He does not deprive us of His bodily presence; but unites us with Himself in this sacrament through the truth of His body and blood.”

“Our bodily eye, on account of the sacramental species, is hindered from beholding the body of Christ underlying them, not merely as by way of veil (just as we are hindered from seeing what is covered with any corporeal veil), but also because Christ’s body bears a relation to the medium surrounding this sacrament, not through its own accidents, but through the sacramental species.”

Therefore there is no bread and wine physically present. Only the accidents/appearance of the bread and wine remain. Christ is physically present in His substance. Only the accidents/appearance of bread and wine remain.

Jim answered for me .

Using the word “physical” in reference to the Eucharist produces confusion only because for most of us, “physical” means the accidents of a particular object and not its substance.

When we say something is ‘physically’ present, we usually mean that we that we can discern the object by its taste, smell, dimensions, duration, molecular structure. Philosophically, those are all accidents. They are not the substance of an object.

After the consecration the substance of bread and wine are gone. The substance of the bread and wine has been transformed into the substance of Christ. But the accidents remain. That’s why we still perceive the accidents of bread and wine. (Note that those accidents do not inhere in any substance, because the bread and wine are gone, replaced by Christ.)

After the consecration, the substance of Jesus Christ is truly present whole and entire, all of him—and yes, he has a body, not merely a “spiritual” body, whatever that may mean. So all of him is present. His whole body, his blood, his human soul, his divine nature, his divine Person.

But we do not perceive his accidents, or appearances. We perceive only the appearances of the bread and wine, whose substance is no longer present.

Because of his mode of presence, he cannot be subdivided (or multiplied). Breaking the host in half or quarters or smaller pieces does not subdivide Christ. He is wholly present under the appearances of each particle, just as the one Christ is present in each host, though he himself is not and cannot be multiplied.

If we chew up the host, we don’t destroy the body of Christ. He remains whole and entire. So cannibalism is impossible.

 

[Luvtosew]

New England Priest explained it real well, and thats is how I understand it also.

 

[Windmill]

This link may help.

ronconte.wordpress.com/2011/05/14/is-jesus-christ-physically-present-in-the-eucharist/